Fraz1:plastic penguin:
Fraz1:No. it would be a huge downwards step. Like most ( but not all) Arcam amps it is gutless. It had a soft almost mushy bass and lacked power. I demo'd it with a few mates and we actually got the guy in the shop to come in and check it as we thought it wasnt wired up correctly. It was. It just an awful amplifier. Steer clear.
Would be nice to hear something constructive instead of openly slagging off Arcam. If you think most, if not all, Arcam amps are gutless then you are an idiot!
Who are you, Arcams defender in chief ? You might try growing up and being an adult instead of taking the huff over someone who has a different opinion to you. The poster asked about the arcam A80 in comparison to the nad 355. Having heard both, and owning a c352 which is v similar to the 355, having demo'd the Arcam A80, diva 65+ , owned an A75+ and had a mate with an A85 i think i am pretty well placed to offer an opinion, and with the exception of the A85 which was a cracking amp, all the others ARE gutless.
No oomph, no balls, no punch,soft bass and lacking power.They made music requiring guts,drive and dynamics sound flat. I thought they were dreadful and not good value for money at all.Compared to the nad there is no comparison. Having read many other peoples comments on this forum over the years I can tell you that I am not the only one who thinks that about arcam amps.
No chief.
I refer back to my last post. The past few posts I've read of yours you've had nothing but disdain towards Arcam. There are many people, including myself, who've had years of enjoyment from the British maker. Offer an alternative brand rather spending the whole post trying to tell everyone that Arcam are pants. Let me reiterate, anyone who bangs on about the right or wrongs of a particular make has a real problem.